Just So You Know

To the guy I guess I’m not dating anymore:

After our last date, I started wondering how to break up with you. Text? Email? Telephone? In person? I decided we’d gone out enough times and you seemed a decent enough guy that you deserved the telephone.

I guess I was wrong.

Your complete failure to contact me since we last met suggests a level of cowardice I hadn’t guessed at. One of the things I liked about you was your confidence. I guess it was just swagger. Guys I would describe as timid have been able to make the phone call. Why couldn’t you?

So I just wanted you to know: I dumped you first. And thank you for removing any possibly regrets I might have had on that consideration.

Advertisements

29 thoughts on “Just So You Know

  1. Why didn’t u just call him to break up? I’ve done that – removes all doubt of who was first.

  2. Taka maybe I shouldve called, uber once I saw it wasn’t shayich I chapped that calling you would mamish be bitul toirah. Ich mein its pas nisht to have dibur with an eesha if its not nogeah, grada I’m happy I could be of help though.

  3. You do recognize that you didn’t call him either, right? So… he’s a coward for not calling you, and you are nothing for not calling him?

  4. OK, from the befuddled comments above, we require some clarification.

    Was it that you called him, he didn’t pick up, you left a message, and he didn’t call back?

  5. @Stam – maybe she did call him. You could actually read the post either way.
    @Ben – is breaking up by text/email really worse than breaking up by just not contacting the other person at all?

    Ugh. Once I went out with a guy who canceled a (third) date at the last minute (like, as I was getting dressed to go…and I don’t take that long getting ready). And then didn’t call me for five days. And then called me and called things off. And then I felt bad about it. Ugh.

  6. @ shira. No, but it is also really bad. So if she was considering doing it, then she shouldn’t be that surprised that he did.

  7. @The Guy- Excellent. One of my former men was very machmir when it came to “al tarbe sicha im haisha”- he seemed to think talking more than once every 1-2 weeks was too much (at least when it came to this particular woman).

  8. I never actually considered text – I simply added it to round out the list, and while I did, I thought “Someone is going to bash me over the head with this.” Some people just get joy out of that. You have to satisfy all types of readers to keep a successful blog.

    I briefly considered email because it was our primary form of communication. It is rare to find a guy who can communicate comfortably through email (Ben, I gather you’re not one of them), but when you find one, it’s a joy. Our calls were all pre-scheduled, which is why I didn’t just pick up the phone. I was waiting for the usual post-date email.

    All you modern girls, calling guys to dump them! In my traditional world, the guy usually initiates. He asks me out. He follows up. And that’s how this one went. Why suddenly change?

  9. I once dated a girl who thought that I had to initiate every contact. I found it a big turn off, and I’m yeshivish as internet trolls get. It made the relationship feel very contrived, and I’m not aware that it is considered a rule.

  10. I agree with bad4. I wait for the guy to initiate; that’s how it’s meant to be. If that feels contrived, then I’m sure you don’t open car doors for women and other such chivalrous acts.

  11. In fact I do open car doors on dates, and all the chivalrous things you want. There is a difference–a very key difference.

    The difference is that I will never know that the girl cares about me and wants to speak to me, if she never reaches out to me. I will never know if she wants to speak more than we are, if she thinks she can never call.

    I will never have the joy of feeling my heart leap when I see it’s her on the caller ID. I’ll never feel my phone vibrate and hope she just texted me.

    The relationship is all about this sort of communication, and you do yourself harm by leaving yourself out of it. I don’t believe chivarly ever required that only the man ever make contact. But if it did, then I heartily disagree with it.

  12. Ben, I guess it depends where you’re up to. In the beginning stage when you’re only communicating to set up the next date, I still believe the guy needs to initiate. When you’re past that and are communicating to say “good morning” and “how’s your day going” then the girl definitely can initiate. I’ve done it and was happy to do it. I agree, there’s nothing like hearing from her/him and knowing that they actually enjoy talking to you.

  13. Ben–
    I think there is a difference between initiating and taking things to the next level, and the need for both parties to be open communicators and not being a closed book in regard to how they are feeling about the relationship. A girl can definitely communicate her interest, and at a certain point make a phone call to the guy on her own, or show in a different way that she is on board and interested. But generally, navigating the relationship and progressing it is the guy’s domain. Its not even a chivalrous thing, more like a role-expectancy thing.

  14. didn’t say its always a guy thing to lead a relationship, said generally. there are always exceptions.

  15. pet peeve:

    I call it more of a “girls who are pathetic cowards and will never have a relationship because of it” kind of thing. But that’s just name calling.

    There is nothing about male/female roles that makes is weird for a woman to tell a man she is dating how she feels about the relationship and about him. And I’m as male chauvinistic as anyone.

  16. Ben, for someone who self-describes as “yeshivish as internet trolls get” you clearly aren’t familiar with Eruvin daf 100b.

  17. “…melamed sheha’isha tova’as balev viha’ish tova bapeh, zu he midda tova b’nashim.”

  18. I have to agree with Ben here. Communication is a two-way street and it is already a difficult task to divine a woman’s thoughts. Being proactive can definitely help grease the wheel’s of communication and make the relationship go smoothly (regardless of its eventual destination).

  19. Here’s a translation in context for that part of eruvin 100b:
    (g) (R. Shmuel bar Nachmani): If a woman asks her husband to have relations, she will have children superior to the generation of Moshe:

    1. Moshe sought “Chachamim u’Nevonim vi’Du’im l’Shivteichem” [to be judges] – he took “Chachamim vi’Du’im”, for he could not find Nevonim;

    2. Leah requested to have relations – “Elai Tavo Ki Sachor Secharticha” – she became pregnant with Yisachar, from whom descended “Yod’ei Vinah la’Itim”.

    (h) Question: But R. Yitzchak bar Avodimi taught that Chavah received 10 curses:

    1. “Harbah Arbeh” – these allude to menstrual and virginal blood;

    2. “Itzvonech” is the pain of raising children;

    3. “V’Heronech” is the pain of pregnancy;

    4. “B’Etzev Teldi Vanim” is understood simply (the pain of birth);

    5. “V’El Ishech Teshukasech” – this teaches that a woman longs for her husband when he goes away;

    6. “V’Hu Yimshal Bach” – a woman desires relations [in her heart] but is too shy to verbalize it, but a man verbalizes it;

    i. This is a good trait in women.

    (i) Answer: She may show affection [but does not say that she desires relations].
    I don’t think it has anything to do with dating, and even if it did, calling a man you are dating would more likely fall into the “showing affection” than “asking to have relations” category. http://dafyomi.co.il/eruvin/points/ev-ps-100.htm

  20. Bad4 I would assume you got that quote from eruvin from some speech or something like that because evidently you never saw it in context. Many a speaker takes a quote totally out of context to prove a point and I guess he tricked you.

  21. When studying Talmud, does one generally assume that a broad statement like “Women don’t state their feelings and this is good” to be valid only in a very specific context?

    Even if we assume that this particular quote is only referring to advances in the bedroom, the behavior stems from a general modesty (or perhaps shyness) that is, presumably, also good.

    Perhaps this wasn’t the best quote for the purpose, but considering the emphasis the quoted put on feminine modesty, I kind of doubt they’d support women chasing men.

  22. Ben,
    based on your comments you sound like you want the best of both worlds: a secular style courtship within the confines of the shidduch system. But remember, a shidduch date (until it progresses close enough to an engagement!) *is* a contrived encounter! If you are dating girls as yeshivish as you describe yourself, I don’t think you’ll come across many yeshivish girls that will be comfortable with actively initiating contact until close to or already engaged. Of course, there’s always the exception that proves the rule, but overall I’d say most girls in these types of circles would react just the way Bad4 did. (And I see nothing wrong with it, especially the way she described it. If he was always the one to email/call her to arrange another date, why wouldn’t she expect him to contact her? It doesn’t sound like they had progressed into a serious relationship, just ventured a bit beyond the basic “getting to know you stage.”

  23. So this is why I don’t do shidduch dating, even though online dating is useless. At least the only rule is “be respectful”. (Sadly, few follow that rule.)

  24. Probably should have gone with the quote in Eilu Metzius that “It is the way of a man to chase after a woman, not the other way around” (Since he was the one who lost his side/ribs)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s